Boardroom Version of Misc Musings, Rants, Ravings, and Random Thoughts

Ok, now that we all feel dumber for having read that tripe, here's a much more thought-provoking article on IT employment:

Quote:

If you’ve worked at enough companies in the IT industry, you’ve probably noticed that the most talented software developers tend to not stick around at one place for too long. The least talented folks, on the other hand, entrench themselves deep within the organization, often building beachheads of bad code that no sane developer would dare go near, all the while ensuring their own job security and screwing up just enough times not to get fired.

I first read it 5 years ago, and of course the ideas in it are much older yet, but it still feels fresh. Apart from the naming scheme, anyway Riffing on "Web 2.0" isn't ironic anymore.

Thanks for sharing. I've been thinking about this article for the last day or so... it articulates a phenomenon I've noticed, but haven't been able to clearly enunciate until reading it: namely, turnover is higher at higher-performing technology companies.

The prevailing wisdom is that turnover is bad, of course, but maybe this is wrong. Maybe low turnover is a marker for a mediocre company? I think there might need to be some parameters and qualifiers around the concept of impact... once a company reaches a certain size, the marginal impact of one more employee is quite low.

So maybe low turnover isn't a sign of a bad company if you're a startup, but low turnover at a Microsoft might be a sign that the tree needs to be shaken.

(This will largely apply only to people who actually "do the work" -- i.e. the implementers. At technology companies, and companies in industries that behave like the software industry.)

On a semi-related note, my tolerance for doing work that should be automated, or made self-service, is constantly decreasing. I don't want to be the only guy who can do X or Y. Because doing X or Y usually gets boring, and is a distraction from more interesting things.

Things that are irritating: enrollment periods that only last two weeks, with clearly-defined times when you can and can't make changes.

I have no problem with the concept of making choices that'll last for a year (unless you get married or something). I have a problem with putting together the whole basket of choices, getting that information out to people, and then telling them they can't make their selections until Monday. Not just Monday, but Monday morning after 9am. As if software and the Internet have working hours.

Ok, now that we all feel dumber for having read that tripe, here's a much more thought-provoking article on IT employment:

Quote:

If you’ve worked at enough companies in the IT industry, you’ve probably noticed that the most talented software developers tend to not stick around at one place for too long. The least talented folks, on the other hand, entrench themselves deep within the organization, often building beachheads of bad code that no sane developer would dare go near, all the while ensuring their own job security and screwing up just enough times not to get fired.

The prevailing wisdom is that turnover is bad, of course, but maybe this is wrong.

I dare say that "prevailing wisdom" includes the idea that some percentage of that turnover is of people who were fired or let go for bad reasons, not so much that they moved on because their skills were in demand elsewhere. Which usually is bad, because it indicates that you're hiring people with crappy skillsets, cannot train them, and cannot afford good skill. Or at least, pick two.

If you're losing people because they go elsewhere after 3+ years, it's less harmful than if your turnover is caused by people being walked out after 6 months, but you don't often hear companies distinguish between the two.

Vendor ordered 3 servers and 4 12-port switches. I thought that was a little overkill, but the vendor said that because these machines were tasked to run 30+ virtual machines between them, and while the machines were virtualized, the network switches were not.

I... I am going home now.

I would pay serious money for a video of them trying to plug those machines in to the switches.

Blame VMware for that; they documented in the 4.x days that you should have redundant connections from your host for each use; 2x for vmkernel, 2x for guest traffic, etc. It could get very crazy quickly.

We have a ESX cluster that is on HP blades that has 6 Ethernet connections as those BP documents suggest; 2x built in plus 4x mezz.

Honestly, Mint, if I pay my semi-annual auto insurance bill then set up a budget item to remind me to set aside some money for next time, that does NOT mean I want an immediate email alert (!!!) that I'm $400 over-budget on insurance for February. Does ANYONE find that behavior useful?

Honestly, Mint, if I pay my semi-annual auto insurance bill then set up a budget item to remind me to set aside some money for next time, that does NOT mean I want an immediate email alert (!!!) that I'm $400 over-budget on insurance for February. Does ANYONE find that behavior useful?

I find that nearly all tools of this nature fail to reasonably handle expenses or income that are not an even multiple of once per month. Presumably, the tool would be smart enough to allow to to set the interval, then allocate an accrual each month until the interval transpired, and then report whether your not your accrual met the expense or whether there was a shortfall.

Ok people, 3 hours before deployment IS NOT THE TIME TO CHANGE ANYTHING.

The worst part is that I know I'm going to do it...

Yip... That was a bad idea. You'd think I'd learn.

Being a cowboy who rolls up, guns blazing, 3 hours before deployment doesn't scale very well.

How would you do it differently in the future?

Customer wants just one "itty bitty" change at the 11th hour? Then I gotta push back on the schedule.

The work was conceptually simple and took only a half hour. However, the changes introduced one data migration bug and exposed another that I'd missed in initial testing. Further testing wasn't done as I had another task that consumed the time between the changes and the deployment.

Honestly, Mint, if I pay my semi-annual auto insurance bill then set up a budget item to remind me to set aside some money for next time, that does NOT mean I want an immediate email alert (!!!) that I'm $400 over-budget on insurance for February. Does ANYONE find that behavior useful?

Honestly, Mint, if I pay my semi-annual auto insurance bill then set up a budget item to remind me to set aside some money for next time, that does NOT mean I want an immediate email alert (!!!) that I'm $400 over-budget on insurance for February. Does ANYONE find that behavior useful?

I had similar issues with Xmas shopping. No shit I'm over budget in a bunch of categories, I'm buying people gifts!

Honestly, Mint, if I pay my semi-annual auto insurance bill then set up a budget item to remind me to set aside some money for next time, that does NOT mean I want an immediate email alert (!!!) that I'm $400 over-budget on insurance for February. Does ANYONE find that behavior useful?

I find that nearly all tools of this nature fail to reasonably handle expenses or income that are not an even multiple of once per month. Presumably, the tool would be smart enough to allow to to set the interval, then allocate an accrual each month until the interval transpired, and then report whether your not your accrual met the expense or whether there was a shortfall.

I think that's what it is trying to do, the model just doesn't work very well when you set up the budget item in a month when you've made a multi-month payment. Maybe what it needs is an "I have already accrued $X toward this expense" field in the setup dialog, so it doesn't panic. Or I should just turn off email notifications and forget about it...

The funniest thing happened. My boss (having absolutely no financial knowledge of how her business works) called me in the meeting after one hour. During the discussion (discussing cash flow problems), I happened to mention to our banker that I might be leaving the company in the next few months (my boss was already aware of that fact). She told me, in front of my boss, that me leaving the company would make a big difference in that she wouldn't feel comfortable leaving credit lines open if I wasn't there to take care of the financial side ; told my boss, "with all due respect, neither your nor your partner can manage the company". Well, this is awkward...

Some US cities (NYC, DC, SF, LA) need to seriously consider foreign real estate ownership restrictions and higher tax penalties on unoccupied dwellings. A lot of homes are being bought by foreign speculators, and in DC it is common for foreign oligarchs to buy houses for their kids to attend GW or Georgetown. A lot of countries don't let foreigners buy real property. Some cities might have to start thinking about that.

Onerous tax penalties on unoccupied dwellings in populated areas is an interesting idea. Real estate has an interesting role somewhere between a necessity and an investment, and I imagine that actual residents would be better off if the speculators didn't have as much incentive (either real or perceived) to buy up so much real estate.

Either that or reforming the zoning system so that you don't just get 10-20% low income reservations (under 45k in DC roughly) but another 20% of mid income reservations (under 80k) and another 20% of median income reservation (80k-110k). Especially since Federal employees top out around $115k and have not gotten a raise in a while. Manhattan is an example of where virtually all new construction is super-high-end and its starting to bleed into Brooklyn. DC is not NYC but it is getting to the point where a nice 1-2BR apartment is renting at a rate where you basically need a childless couple earning 200k combined to afford the rent or buy it. Its going to end up hurting the rest of the DC economy when everyone is house-poor and can't spend on restaurants and shopping.

That being said... there are "reasonable" (for widely varying opinions of "reasonable" options available in the greater DC area, but you have to be willing to accept a longer commute and/or be patient. I'm renting, but a condo on my floor had an open house this weekend for $225K. I'd say it is a good deal at that, except that I know the condo fees in the building are enormous (but fees cover all utilities, pool, 24 hour front desk, gym, sauna, etc.). There are plenty of properties in the $350-450K range if you're willing to compromise slightly on location.

He's not talking about vacant per se, but second (and third, fourth, etc.) residences that are not occupied most of the time. Some cities have a significantly higher property tax rate if the dwelling is not your primary residence.

Do you ever come across someone from college high school/gradeschool on LinkedIn, and you look at their job description and title and immediately think "Yeah, I feel bad for that company"?

I had someone from grade school actually add me on Linkedin. We went to the same high school. Long story short, from this grade school (of a graduating class of 55-60), maybe 10 of us went to college? Of those, 5 or 6 actually finished.

So his linkedin title "Grocery Packaging Specialist", followed by dubious knife and home insurance salesman type stuff. And he was one of the smart ones too! So maybe I don't feel bad for the company per say, but more a reflection on the effects of what a college degree can or can't get you (and where I cam from)?

1. Change in title to a more prestigious one.2. More freedom.3. I get to keep doing the same job, which I really like.4. Compensation restructured = a 17% raise.5. Getting said raise described as "well deserved" by my boss.6. Wally will likely be departing real soon now.

1. Change in title to a more prestigious one.2. More freedom.3. I get to keep doing the same job, which I really like.4. Compensation restructured = a 17% raise.5. Getting said raise described as "well deserved" by my boss.6. Wally will likely be departing real soon now.

1. Change in title to a more prestigious one.2. More freedom.3. I get to keep doing the same job, which I really like.4. Compensation restructured = a 17% raise.5. Getting said raise described as "well deserved" by my boss.6. Wally will likely be departing real soon now.

1. Change in title to a more prestigious one.2. More freedom.3. I get to keep doing the same job, which I really like.4. Compensation restructured = a 17% raise.5. Getting said raise described as "well deserved" by my boss.6. Wally will likely be departing real soon now.

1. Change in title to a more prestigious one.2. More freedom.3. I get to keep doing the same job, which I really like.4. Compensation restructured = a 17% raise.5. Getting said raise described as "well deserved" by my boss.6. Wally will likely be departing real soon now.

In other news, my boss is back from vacation and will be promoting my replacement before the end of the day today. Which means that I can finally start telling people I'm leaving. He asked me today "So, no one here knows?" and was incredulous that I hadn't told anyone yet. I said I wouldn't, he should know me well enough by now to know I keep my promises, even when they're really freaking hard to keep and I just want to tell everyone the good (for me) news!